Politics FACSIA spending

[tandino]

Some have even suggested zonal tax rebates/scales (Barnaby picked up on this recently).

I'm no constitutional lawyer, but why are the current zonal tax rebates legal under the constitution? Specifically,

51. The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:
(ii.) Taxation; but so as not to discriminate between States or parts of States:

 

[azreal]

Yes it is. How can race specific funding not be racist policy? Ditto funding the multicultural industry.

Why do we even need a department for indigenous affairs? Why do we need an office for women? Why do we need a minister for multiculturalism?

I think you are being a little simplistic. Indigenous affairs is an area that needs massive help/work in Australia, so a dedicated department seems sensible to me. If we needed a department to deal with the many remote and regional Aboriginal communities and the significant disadvantages that they face, doesn't it make sense that it would be the department of indigenous affairs. Or would you be appeased by a name change, perhaps the department of remote communities?


And whilst I wouldnt feel comfortable with the idea of government funds going to lots of organisations where they can purchase businesses, I feel that by allowing this with these extremely remote communities, we are empowering the real disadvantaged folk in our society to look after themselves. They gain work opportunities and their money which is spent in these businesses then remains in the communities. This will hopefully reduce the need for so much government assistance in the future.

 

[medusala]

I think you are being a little simplistic. Indigenous affairs is an area that needs massive help/work in Australia, so a dedicated department seems sensible to me.

Billions have been urinated against a wall. ATSIC was a universally acknowledged disgrace.

And whilst I wouldnt feel comfortable with the idea of government funds going to lots of organisations where they can purchase businesses, I feel that by allowing this with these extremely remote communities, we are empowering the real disadvantaged folk in our society to look after themselves.

They arent empowered. This is Pearson's point. To do that individuals need to be empowered not councils. The councils as with virtually all other councils in Australia are poorly run.

They gain work opportunities and their money which is spent in these businesses then remains in the communities.

This sort of Keynesian policy was discredited decades ago.

How it still gets a run with respect to Aboriginal affairs I dont know.

How many more billions have to be wasted until the culprits admit their policies have been an unmitigated disaster?

No rational person can argue the problems are as a result of a lack of federal government spending.

 

[azreal]

Did you see the figure?

$393,800.00

The parcel of land shouldn't cost anything, they own that. After that you need to shift dirt. Hire a bull dozer and what not.

Communities that actually bother to help themselves would achieve that via a working bee type operation. Honestly, everyone regardless of what their race should be expected to help themselves where they can.

Hmmm, lets see, possibly a drink fountain, shelter from the sun, access for vehicles so that rubbish can be collected, public toilet, I am sure there are many ways the money was spent, just because you can't think of them, doesn't mean it was wasted.


Sometimes it is very hard for communities with extreme disadvantage to help themselves (If you don't understand this, go and visit the Territory or the Kimberley, the problems will become pretty obvious, pretty quickly). Many of these regions are lacking the real basic community facilities that you and I take for granted. I think it is poor form to bleat and moan about the limited amounts of money they do receive.

 

[azreal]

Billions have been urinated against a wall. ATSIC was a universally acknowledged disgrace.



They arent empowered. This is Pearson's point. To do that individuals need to be empowered not councils. The councils as with virtually all other councils in Australia are poorly run.



This sort of Keynesian policy was discredited decades ago.

How it still gets a run with respect to Aboriginal affairs I dont know.

How many more billions have to be wasted until the culprits admit their policies have been an unmitigated disaster?

No rational person can argue the problems are as a result of a lack of federal government spending.

Nobody is arguing that money hasn't been wasted in the past, doesn't mean we should cut off the supply.

Not all councils are poorly run, some achieve significant social change, just look at how some communities have turned around the alcohol situation, school attendance. Many communities such significantly different needs, probably why we need such a large department to help them all.

The problems are a result of inadequately spent dollars and in many areas a lack of dollars.

 

[medusala]

I think it is poor form to bleat and moan about the limited amounts of money they do receive.

http://www.aph.gov.au/Library/Pubs/BN/2007-08/Cwlth_Indigenous_Expenditure.htm

$4bn odd is limited?

 

[azreal]

http://www.aph.gov.au/Library/Pubs/BN/2007-08/Cwlth_Indigenous_Expenditure.htm

$4bn odd is limited?

No community has received $4bn. The money is spent across a wide range of regions, across hundreds of thousands of people where isolation and extreme distances can add significant extra costs to even the simplest projects. And many of these people are living in 3rd world conditions, so it would be expected that when all the amounts were added up it would be large, but individual areas do receive limited amounts of money, compared to their actual needs or disadvantages.

 

[medusala]

The money is spent across a wide range of regions, across hundreds of thousands of people where isolation and extreme distances can add significant extra costs to even the simplest projects.

No white folk live in isolated parts of the country then? Why does it have to be aboriginal specific?

 

[azreal]

No white folk live in isolated parts of the country then? Why does it have to be aboriginal specific?

Well, the vast majority of people living in Aboriginal communities actually happen to be Aboriginal. Non indigenous people living in rural and remote locations still have access to government departments and assistance. Doesn't it make sense to have a dedicated department focused on the specific needs of its clients?

 

[medusala]

Doesn't it make sense to have a dedicated department focused on the specific needs of its clients?

You want one department for everyone else in outback Australia and another for aboriginals?

Excuse me for thinking one bunch of public servants is more than enough.

If you want to argue the states should do it rather than the feds I might agree. That still doesnt justify race based spending.

It most certainly doesnt justify councils being given cash to run businesses in that manner.

 

[azreal]

You want one department for everyone else in outback Australia and another for aboriginals?

Excuse me for thinking one bunch of public servants is more than enough.

If you want to argue the states should do it rather than the feds I might agree. That still doesnt justify race based spending.

It most certainly doesnt justify councils being given cash to run businesses in that manner.

No, I want government departments to be focused on the needs of their clients, pretty simple really.

Only a moron would suggest Indigenous Affairs is an area that doesn't need special attention in Australia. (Not suggesting that you are) Indigenous affairs is an area of critical need, that justifies the department.

 

[medusala]

Only a moron would suggest Indigenous Affairs is an area that doesn't need special attention in Australia.

Yet the current way is and has been for decades an utter disaster.

This special attention is a very large part of the reason for the failure. ATSIC was a disgrace and the local councils are little better.

Special attention is often just another excuse for state interference.

The issue will never get resolved until individuals are empowered and welfare dependency ends.

Time to give Pearson's ideas a go. Cant be any worse than the current waste of billions.

 

[azreal]

Yet the current way is and has been for decades an utter disaster.

This special attention is a very large part of the reason for the failure. ATSIC was a disgrace and the local councils are little better.

Special attention is often just another excuse for state interference.

The issue will never get resolved until individuals are empowered and welfare dependency ends.

Time to give Pearson's ideas a go. Cant be any worse than the current waste of billions.

I agree with this. I also agree that there is extreme waste, but there is also extreme need in many more areas. No change is possible while the basics such as housing, food, clothing and education are not being adequately provided for Aboriginal children. These things cost a huge amount of money to do properly.

Ending welfare dependency is going to cost an absolute bucket load of money unless Aboriginal people are encouraged to move to larger towns. There are just not the opportunities for work in many of the communities and to set up projects, such as aquaculture or tourism, will cost a lot.

I don't think there is any quick fix solution, however, people with housing, food, education and good health are more likely to achieve something with their lives, so maybe we should start by making sure everyone has access to the basics.

 

[Scotland]

I don't think there is any quick fix solution, however, people with housing, food, education and good health are more likely to achieve something with their lives, so maybe we should start by making sure everyone has access to the basics.

Many non-Indigenous people go without food, housing, education and good health each night in Australia. According the last census there are over 100,000 homeless in Australia, and <20% are Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander. These people fall under the banner of everyone, but are not entitled to preferential Indigenous spending.

Money has been thrown at Aboriginal communities for decades and hasn't helped. Throw dollars and you make the dependency worse, cut off the money supply and you don't care, provide food stamps and you're insenstive - you can't win. The only real solution I can see to solving the problems within Aboriginal communities involves serious intervention, and that will be derided as racist and divisive. It's a complex issue, but the reality is you can't make any improvement without upsetting someone along the way.

 

[azreal]

Many non-Indigenous people go without food, housing, education and good health each night in Australia. According the last census there are over 100,000 homeless in Australia, and <20% are Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander. These people fall under the banner of everyone, but are not entitled to preferential Indigenous spending.

Money has been thrown at Aboriginal communities for decades and hasn't helped. Throw dollars and you make the dependency worse, cut off the money supply and you don't care, provide food stamps and you're insenstive - you can't win. The only real solution I can see to solving the problems within Aboriginal communities involves serious intervention, and that will be derided as racist and divisive. It's a complex issue, but the reality is you can't make any improvement without upsetting someone along the way.

As a proportion of the population, the problems within Indigenous communities is seriously a lot worse. I don't disagree with helping non Indigenous Australians with needs, I do believe we could be and should be doing a lot more to help them. However, their lack of facilities is no justification for not providing care for Indigenous communities with significant needs.

I have no problem with serious and significant intervention, when and where it is required. However, to do this properly requires a lot of money, so we can't complain about the cost of such measures.

 

[Chief]

Surely there must be a better alternative. Noel Pearson for one has been talking about this for a while.

There probably is. I'm not across it all so I shouldn't really comment.

I do have to say that in one community I know of, simple things like getting a drivers license mean flying in an instructor. Same with getting a machinery ticket of any kind. Expensive but in the end a good use of money as it gives individuals something they can use to improve their economic condition. If they end up moving to a bigger town or city they have, say, a forklift ticket and can get work instead of joining the ranks of unemployed in the new city.

 

[DeanoT]

There probably is. I'm not across it all so I shouldn't really comment.

I do have to say that in one community I know of, simple things like getting a drivers license mean flying in an instructor. Same with getting a machinery ticket of any kind. Expensive but in the end a good use of money as it gives individuals something they can use to improve their economic condition. If they end up moving to a bigger town or city they have, say, a forklift ticket and can get work instead of joining the ranks of unemployed in the new city.

All of that makes perfect rational sense. To a non-indigenous person.

The problem that I have seen of much indigenous policy is that it pre-supposes that indigenous people WANT to live like the rest of the country, and gain an education, move to a bigger town/city with better opportunities, find employment, buy a house, and raise children to do the same.

Usually such assumptions are the underpinnings of government policy, and are often the reason for its failure, together with the lack of belief within indigenous communities that they could ever achieve what you propose.

But like many here, and in government, I don't have the panacea.

Leave them to do as they please in their own communities, or try to "educate" them to live like the rest of us do, and risk imposing our own morals and beliefs upon them ?

Complex.

 

[azreal]

This country needs to develop a new consensus around our commitment to welfare. This consensus needs to be built on the principles of personal and family empowerment and investment and the utilisation of resources to achieve lasting change. In other words our motivation to reform welfare must be based on the principle that dependency and passivity are a scourge and must be avoided at all costs. Dependency and passivity kills people and is the surest road to social decline. Australians do not have an inalienable right to dependency, they have an inalienable right to a fair place in the real economy.

There is an alternative definition of welfare reform that will take hold in the absence of the definition that I have just outlined. This alternative definition sees welfare reform as a matter of moral judgment on the part of those who have security of employment and who 'pay taxes' in relation to people whose dependency is seen as a moral failing. Indeed this alternative definition is laced with the idea that welfare reform should be about punishment of bludgers. In other words we are seeking to reform welfare because we are concerned about the sentiments of those who work and who pay taxes - and welfare recipients owe these people a moral obligation. Welfare reform in this alternative definition could also be merely a means of reducing government commitments and decreasing taxation of those who already have a place in the economy.


Noel Pearson 2000


The first paragraph is spot on, but will cost a lot and I can't see how it could ever happen nation wide simultaneously.

The second paragraph outlines a belief that I think too many Australians hold.

 

[medusala]

The first paragraph is spot on, but will cost a lot and I can't see how it could ever happen nation wide simultaneously.

The second paragraph outlines a belief that I think too many Australians hold.

The tax system plays a decent part. People often face very high effective marginal tax rates to get off welfare. That needs to be addressed.

The other issue which everyone ignores is the detrimental effect of a high minimum wage with respect to the average wage (and even more so for youth wages).

Adress those two issues and things would change and probably quite dramatically (though disability pension needs to be looked at as well).

However, talk of not increasing the minimum wage and their will be howls of protest. Plenty would rather sacrifice those on welfare.

I have heard it said many times that changes in wage rates for aboriginal farm hands had a hugely negative effect. Even given the vested interests involved there might just be something in that.

 

[cancat]

All of that makes perfect rational sense. To a non-indigenous person.

The problem that I have seen of much indigenous policy is that it pre-supposes that indigenous people WANT to live like the rest of the country, and gain an education, move to a bigger town/city with better opportunities, find employment, buy a house, and raise children to do the same.

Usually such assumptions are the underpinnings of government policy, and are often the reason for its failure, together with the lack of belief within indigenous communities that they could ever achieve what you propose.

But like many here, and in government, I don't have the panacea.

Leave them to do as they please in their own communities, or try to "educate" them to live like the rest of us do, and risk imposing our own morals and beliefs upon them ?

Complex.

I'm with you Deano. I find it perplexing and frustrating. But at the same time I refuse to believe that indigenous people want to have low life expectancies, poor health, disfunctional societies and low acheivement levels for their kids.

I think we need to have the moral courage to go beyond accusations of racism and seriously look at policies designed to bring indigenous society into the modern world. I am no expert but from looking at the FACSIA list current policies seem to be based on just throwing money at people in their current situations. I believe that many of the problems are based on that many of the communities are so remote and isolated. It becomes very expensive and impractical to support that type of community to a standard we are comfortable with in modern day society.

I'd like to see money and initiatives targetted at bringing people into larger and more manageable communities. If people want to live in remote locations then that is their choice but make it public policy - we cannot and will not support you to the same extent.

I believe the race issue gets in the way. Some people take advantage of it, some people are too sensitive to it. To help get round the problem I would engage progressives of indigenous descent like Noel Pearson to push the agendas.

Government has a responsibility to spend taxpayer's money wisely and improve outcomes. I don't think we are getting either at the moment.

 

[DeanoT]

I'm with you Deano. I find it perplexing and frustrating. But at the same time I refuse to believe that indigenous people want to have low life expectancies, poor health, disfunctional societies and low acheivement levels for their kids.

I think we need to have the moral courage to go beyond accusations of racism and seriously look at policies designed to bring indigenous society into the modern world. I am no expert but from looking at the FACSIA list current policies seem to be based on just throwing money at people in their current situations. I believe that many of the problems are based on that many of the communities are so remote and isolated. It becomes very expensive and impractical to support that type of community to a standard we are comfortable with in modern day society.

I'd like to see money and initiatives targetted at bringing people into larger and more manageable communities. If people want to live in remote locations then that is their choice but make it public policy - we cannot and will not support you to the same extent.

I believe the race issue gets in the way. Some people take advantage of it, some people are too sensitive to it. To help get round the problem I would engage progressives of indigenous descent like Noel Pearson to push the agendas.

Government has a responsibility to spend taxpayer's money wisely and improve outcomes. I don't think we are getting either at the moment.

At my previous firm, I used to do organisational reviews of government-funded indigenous organisations which exist to provide health and counselling services to indigenous people in remote locations. I could almost write the report before I visited each of them.

No effective financial management or control, no effective corporate governance, substantial "loans" taken out by Directors, and no measurement of outcomes achieved in the key service areas.

Our recommendations usually went along the lines of "spill the Board, appoint and administrator, sack the auditor (who usually was raping the org of excessive accounting fees), install proper financial management, and inject $x.xm immediately to prevent the organisation from being unable to meet its expenditure for accommodation, medical supplies, counselling service providers, staff payroll, etc".

The funding agency (ATSIC, FACSIA, or the State govt equivalents) would inevitably not agree to all of our recommendations, except the one about injecting additional $x.xm of funds to meet expenditure. Predictably, about 1-2 years later we would be asked to go back to the same organisation, to perform the same review, and end up with the same report, findings, recommendations and resultant (in)action by the funding agency. No-one wanted to make the hard decisions, or hold the organisation accountable, let alone investigate potential misappropriation of funds.

A lack of balls on behalf of Ministers on both sides of politics, and bureaucreats, to make gutsy decisions (along the lines of those you propose) is half the problem. Add in white man's red tape, and fear of accusations of racism for taking a hard line, or interventionist approach, and you have a recipe for spending $billions of taxpayer money for no outcome. And that is exactly what we've got.

 

[azreal]

Yeah, I have seen some shonky health organisations. Private number plates (the expensive ones-not just gov't ones) for the health service cars, limited home visits to those most at need.
The ability to attract and maintain competent staff in many of these areas is an issue. I have met many that are employed in Health and Education services that realistically should be nowhere near people, let alone have any influence over other peoples lives, yet with no competition for jobs, the bottom of the barrel gets employment. The state government does offer significant financial bonuses to get staff to go to the remote locations, but they need to focus more on getting quality staff with experience, who are prepared for the challenges.

 

[DeanoT]

Yeah, I have seen some shonky health organisations. Private number plates (the expensive ones-not just gov't ones) for the health service cars, limited home visits to those most at need.
The ability to attract and maintain competent staff in many of these areas is an issue. I have met many that are employed in Health and Education services that realistically should be nowhere near people, let alone have any influence over other peoples lives, yet with no competition for jobs, the bottom of the barrel gets employment. The state government does offer significant financial bonuses to get staff to go to the remote locations, but they need to focus more on getting quality staff with experience, who are prepared for the challenges.

Agree getting quality staff to live in remote areas is a real challenge.

Most staff seem to be running from some part of crisis in their life. I discovered in one community that I worked, that all the white employees were swingers, and I was invited to participate. One of our female staff who did a follow up review a few months later was also propositioned. I guess that's what the boredom of the outback will do to you.

In one case, the Health Services Manager was the community drug dealer.

Few philanthropic minded Australians seem to end up in indigenous communities. Most with such an inclination seem to prefer UN/Red Cross type work overseas, despite the $ on offer in Oz.

 

[azreal]

Agree getting quality staff to live in remote areas is a real challenge.

Most staff seem to be running from some part of crisis in their life. I discovered in one community that I worked, that all the white employees were swingers, and I was invited to participate. One of our female staff who did a follow up review a few months later was also propositioned. I guess that's what the boredom of the outback will do to you.

In one case, the Health Services Manager was the community drug dealer.

Few philanthropic minded Australians seem to end up in indigenous communities. Most with such an inclination seem to prefer UN/Red Cross type work overseas, despite the $ on offer in Oz.

Absolutely. Gone up north to hide from reality. Far too often that means hiding in a bottle.

 

[cancat]

Absolutely. Gone up north to hide from reality. Far too often that means hiding in a bottle.

Sounds like it is the Aussie equivalent of the French Foreign Legion!